What you possibly did not know about nuclear tests in NTS (1 Viewer)

[Finlay]

Hello! Resumption of nuclear testing by the Pentagon is widely discussed nowadays in the US. I think I will express mutual opinion if I say that not everything is so smooth and plain about this.

It is expected that on June 2 a new series of nuclear tests will take start in Nevada test site. This day, a gigantic 700-ton bunker-buster will get detonated underground. Other nuclear tests including atmospheric ones will take place on miscellaneous sites in the United States (these are sites in Nevada, New Mexico, Alaska, Colorado, and Mississippi) during the following three years.

Some people will say "Well, there is nothing to be so tragic about. America has been conducting nuclear tests since 1945 or so with over 1,100 tests conducted. A few more tests change nothing". And they will be wrong - they perhaps live in NY and simply don't care or know nothing about aftermaths of nuclear tests.

Just for your information I found the following.

In a report by the National Cancer Institute, released in 1997, it was determined that ninety atmospheric tests at the Nevada Test Site deposited high levels of radioactive iodine-131 in the contiguous States of America. The doses were large enough to produce 25,000 to 100,000 cases of thyroid cancer caused by nuclear fallout exposure in cities downwind of the NTS. A lot of people got seriously ill and many died. Only about a one third of total amount of persons suffering from certain illnesses were able to receive compensation of $50,000 (do you think it is so much in comparison with lost health or birth defects due to exposure? I don't think so)

There are only several downwind states that will have to buff radioactive fallout exposure. These are Utah, Idaho, Montana, Kansas, Nebraska, and South and North Dakota. Unfortunately, people that live in these states are absolutely defenseless in the face of nuclear fallout threat, yet not many of them are likely to receive compensation. There is only one way we can help them - protest against new nuclear tests. If all conscientious Americans go for protest actions at once, this must have an effect on the White Hall and finally we will achieve overall ban of nuclear tests on the territory of US!

 

[cherokee]

Hello! Resumption of nuclear testing by the Pentagon is widely discussed nowadays in the US. I think I will express mutual opinion if I say that not everything is so smooth and plain about this.

It is expected that on June 2 a new series of nuclear tests will take start in Nevada test site. This day, a gigantic 700-ton bunker-buster will get detonated underground. Other nuclear tests including atmospheric ones will take place on miscellaneous sites in the United States (these are sites in Nevada, New Mexico, Alaska, Colorado, and Mississippi) during the following three years.

Some people will say "Well, there is nothing to be so tragic about. America has been conducting nuclear tests since 1945 or so with over 1,100 tests conducted. A few more tests change nothing". And they will be wrong - they perhaps live in NY and simply don't care or know nothing about aftermaths of nuclear tests.

Just for your information I found the following.

In a report by the National Cancer Institute, released in 1997, it was determined that ninety atmospheric tests at the Nevada Test Site deposited high levels of radioactive iodine-131 in the contiguous States of America. The doses were large enough to produce 25,000 to 100,000 cases of thyroid cancer caused by nuclear fallout exposure in cities downwind of the NTS. A lot of people got seriously ill and many died. Only about a one third of total amount of persons suffering from certain illnesses were able to receive compensation of $50,000 (do you think it is so much in comparison with lost health or birth defects due to exposure? I don't think so)

There are only several downwind states that will have to buff radioactive fallout exposure. These are Utah, Idaho, Montana, Kansas, Nebraska, and South and North Dakota. Unfortunately, people that live in these states are absolutely defenseless in the face of nuclear fallout threat, yet not many of them are likely to receive compensation. There is only one way we can help them - protest against new nuclear tests. If all conscientious Americans go for protest actions at once, this must have an effect on the White Hall and finally we will achieve overall ban of nuclear tests on the territory of US!

Can you give us the link for this story?

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Hello! Resumption of nuclear testing by the Pentagon is widely discussed nowadays in the US. I think I will express mutual opinion if I say that not everything is so smooth and plain about this.

It is expected that on June 2 a new series of nuclear tests will take start in Nevada test site. This day, a gigantic 700-ton bunker-buster will get detonated underground. Other nuclear tests including atmospheric ones will take place on miscellaneous sites in the United States (these are sites in Nevada, New Mexico, Alaska, Colorado, and Mississippi) during the following three years.

Some people will say "Well, there is nothing to be so tragic about. America has been conducting nuclear tests since 1945 or so with over 1,100 tests conducted. A few more tests change nothing". And they will be wrong - they perhaps live in NY and simply don't care or know nothing about aftermaths of nuclear tests.

Just for your information I found the following.

In a report by the National Cancer Institute, released in 1997, it was determined that ninety atmospheric tests at the Nevada Test Site deposited high levels of radioactive iodine-131 in the contiguous States of America. The doses were large enough to produce 25,000 to 100,000 cases of thyroid cancer caused by nuclear fallout exposure in cities downwind of the NTS. A lot of people got seriously ill and many died. Only about a one third of total amount of persons suffering from certain illnesses were able to receive compensation of $50,000 (do you think it is so much in comparison with lost health or birth defects due to exposure? I don't think so)

There are only several downwind states that will have to buff radioactive fallout exposure. These are Utah, Idaho, Montana, Kansas, Nebraska, and South and North Dakota. Unfortunately, people that live in these states are absolutely defenseless in the face of nuclear fallout threat, yet not many of them are likely to receive compensation. There is only one way we can help them - protest against new nuclear tests. If all conscientious Americans go for protest actions at once, this must have an effect on the White Hall and finally we will achieve overall ban of nuclear tests on the territory of US!

So what? The tests ARE underground, the fission products will be contained, and there will be no fallout. Thus, no problem.

Your vague claim about "Other nuclear tests including atmospheric ones will take place on miscellaneous sites in the United States (these are sites in Nevada, New Mexico, Alaska, Colorado, and Mississippi) during the following three years" is simple BS, nothing else.

But, if we conducted above ground tests on the Mexican border and fried a bunch of invaders, I'd be very supportive.

 

[Deegan]

This is all about ending the Iran conflict, proceed with the tests, I can't wait to smack the grin of their presidents face!

 

[bobjohnston]

There's some misinformation here. The planned June test, which has been delayed, was a non-nuclear conventional explosive test. The current underground tests conducted at the NTS are subcritical tests, tests for example using high explosives to act on small amounts of nuclear material, but not using quantities or configurations which result in any significant nuclear yield. There are NO current plans to resume nuclear testing.

Either type of activity does not cause fallout. But in addition, the cited 1997 NCI study on fallout is a bit misleading. A followup study in 1999 said the following in the executive summary (http://www.nap.edu/books/030906175X/html/):

Epidemiological analyses of past thyroid cancer incidence and mortality rates provide little evidence of widespread increases in thyroid cancer risk related to the pattern of exposure to I-131 described in the NCI report (Chapter 3 on Epidemiologic Analyses Using Cancer Registries). They suggest that any increase in the number of thyroid cancer cases is likely to be in the lower part of the ranges estimated by NCI. The epidemiologic analyses are, however, subject to many limitations and uncertainties.

and also

According to the NCI's revised estimates, which are not broken down by state or county, exposure to I-131 from the Nevada atmospheric tests will produce between 11,300 and 212,000 excess lifetime cases of thyroid cancer with a point or central estimate of 49,000 cases. The committee considered the NCI approach to developing estimates of excess cancer cases due to iodine-131 exposure generally reasonable, but the committee did raise questions about certain assumptions. In particular, it noted that there is disagreement within the scientific community about the assumption of dose-response linearity, that is, the assumption that even the smallest dose of iodine-131 to the thyroid results in some excess risk of cancer. Most exposure to iodine-131 following the Nevada tests was low-level exposure for which evidence of cancer risk is very limited.

Note that these are estimates of excess cases based on certain assumptions about radiation effects, not numbers which are reflected in any actual examinations of numbers of thyroid cancers. As noted in the first quote, cohort studies involving areas estimated to have high I-131 doses do not show excess thyroid cancers consistent with the NCI estimates.